<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sotomayor a true judge &#8212; incoherent *UPDATED*</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/07/14/sotomayor-a-true-judge-incoherent/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/07/14/sotomayor-a-true-judge-incoherent/</link>
	<description>Conservatives deal with facts and reach conclusions; liberals have conclusions and sell them as facts.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 18:07:12 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Charles Martel</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/07/14/sotomayor-a-true-judge-incoherent/comment-page-1/#comment-58502</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Martel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:41:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=7384#comment-58502</guid>
		<description>=SIGH= 

Lack of morning coffee = lack of higher brain function.

Pay no attention to the Martel behind that curtain.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>=SIGH= </p>
<p>Lack of morning coffee = lack of higher brain function.</p>
<p>Pay no attention to the Martel behind that curtain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Martel</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/07/14/sotomayor-a-true-judge-incoherent/comment-page-1/#comment-58501</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Martel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:39:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=7384#comment-58501</guid>
		<description>Ooops, wrong topic.

However, as Eleanor Roosevelt would say, &quot;Nevertheless.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ooops, wrong topic.</p>
<p>However, as Eleanor Roosevelt would say, &#8220;Nevertheless.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Martel</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/07/14/sotomayor-a-true-judge-incoherent/comment-page-1/#comment-58500</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Martel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:38:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=7384#comment-58500</guid>
		<description>Sarah Palin would have tossed a fastball strike right up the middle.

While holding Trig.

In heels.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sarah Palin would have tossed a fastball strike right up the middle.</p>
<p>While holding Trig.</p>
<p>In heels.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: suek</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/07/14/sotomayor-a-true-judge-incoherent/comment-page-1/#comment-58494</link>
		<dc:creator>suek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:17:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=7384#comment-58494</guid>
		<description>Mike...

Love it!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike&#8230;</p>
<p>Love it!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Danny Lemieux</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/07/14/sotomayor-a-true-judge-incoherent/comment-page-1/#comment-58486</link>
		<dc:creator>Danny Lemieux</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 16:38:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=7384#comment-58486</guid>
		<description>Let me see if I understand...Obama&#039;s girlie-man pitch curved downwards to the Left and fell short of its target and thudded down in a cloud of dirt. Did I get that Right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let me see if I understand&#8230;Obama&#8217;s girlie-man pitch curved downwards to the Left and fell short of its target and thudded down in a cloud of dirt. Did I get that Right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BrianE</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/07/14/sotomayor-a-true-judge-incoherent/comment-page-1/#comment-58482</link>
		<dc:creator>BrianE</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 16:06:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=7384#comment-58482</guid>
		<description>Obama&#039;s throw proves he&#039;s not a natural born citizen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama&#8217;s throw proves he&#8217;s not a natural born citizen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BrianE</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/07/14/sotomayor-a-true-judge-incoherent/comment-page-1/#comment-58480</link>
		<dc:creator>BrianE</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 16:01:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=7384#comment-58480</guid>
		<description>Yesterday
&lt;blockquote&gt;Speaking only for myself (I guess that&#039;s obvious), I was completely disgusted by Judge Sotomayor&#039;s testimony today. If she was not perjuring herself, she is intellectually unqualified to be on the Supreme Court. If she was perjuring herself, she is morally unqualified. How could someone who has been on the bench for seventeen years possibly believe that judging in hard cases involves no more than applying the law to the facts?...-  Louis Seidman, Georgetown Law Professor&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Then today:
&lt;blockquote&gt;I want to elaborate on some of the (perhaps intemperate) comments I made last night. There&#039;s no denying that Republicans on the committee put Judge Sotomayor in a difficult moral position, and I need not elaborate on their own culpability for doing so. Either Judge Sotomayor had to misrepresent what she knows judges (all judges, conservative and liberal) do in hard cases, or she had to risk defeat.- Seidman&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Then this:
Radford University&#039;s Matthew J. Franck replies:

&lt;blockquote&gt;For my part I find the president&#039;s account of the role of &quot;empathy&quot; in judging to be alarming, and I would welcome Judge Sotomayor&#039;s repudiation of his arguments—if I believed her. Frankly, I don&#039;t.

I think I know what you mean by the &quot;official version&quot; of what judges do. I agree with you that &quot;applying law to facts&quot; is too simplistic to capture the nuances of what Felix Frankfurter called &quot;judicial judgment.&quot; But if it&#039;s not where I would stop, it&#039;s not a bad place to start. And if you mean to say that the political convictions of judges are either a) inevitably a part of their legal judgments or b) desirable elements of the same, then I disagree. Certainly their political convictions are not desirable elements in judicial judgment, and to the extent that they inevitably creep in, they should be minimized as close to the vanishing point as possible by every conscious effort a judge can muster.

Judge Sotomayor, in the speeches from which she now flees unconvincingly—sorry, I mean which she now assures us were misunderstood—takes the view that gender and ethnicity influence the convictions of the judge, which in turn influence legal outcomes. Like the president, she celebrated this rather than worrying about it. Now she sings a different tune.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
 
The hearing is particularly disgusting. The next Supreme Court Justice of the United States, is lying though her teeth. Everyone on the left and right knows she is lying through her teeth and apparently no one cares.
I know that she is trying to appear reasonable, and Republicans are trying to get her to admit her deep desire to replace the Constitution with the communist manifesto, but either she has enough contempt for the process to not even attempt to disguise her lying, or she doesn&#039;t have the intellectual ability to fend off the Republicans while remaining true to her core principles.
Either way she doesn&#039;t deserve to be on the court. Yuck.
Yahoo headline:
&lt;strong&gt;Sotomayor vows stability even as trailblazing justice&lt;/strong&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yesterday</p>
<blockquote><p>Speaking only for myself (I guess that&#8217;s obvious), I was completely disgusted by Judge Sotomayor&#8217;s testimony today. If she was not perjuring herself, she is intellectually unqualified to be on the Supreme Court. If she was perjuring herself, she is morally unqualified. How could someone who has been on the bench for seventeen years possibly believe that judging in hard cases involves no more than applying the law to the facts?&#8230;-  Louis Seidman, Georgetown Law Professor</p></blockquote>
<p>Then today:</p>
<blockquote><p>I want to elaborate on some of the (perhaps intemperate) comments I made last night. There&#8217;s no denying that Republicans on the committee put Judge Sotomayor in a difficult moral position, and I need not elaborate on their own culpability for doing so. Either Judge Sotomayor had to misrepresent what she knows judges (all judges, conservative and liberal) do in hard cases, or she had to risk defeat.- Seidman</p></blockquote>
<p>Then this:<br />
Radford University&#8217;s Matthew J. Franck replies:</p>
<blockquote><p>For my part I find the president&#8217;s account of the role of &#8220;empathy&#8221; in judging to be alarming, and I would welcome Judge Sotomayor&#8217;s repudiation of his arguments—if I believed her. Frankly, I don&#8217;t.</p>
<p>I think I know what you mean by the &#8220;official version&#8221; of what judges do. I agree with you that &#8220;applying law to facts&#8221; is too simplistic to capture the nuances of what Felix Frankfurter called &#8220;judicial judgment.&#8221; But if it&#8217;s not where I would stop, it&#8217;s not a bad place to start. And if you mean to say that the political convictions of judges are either a) inevitably a part of their legal judgments or b) desirable elements of the same, then I disagree. Certainly their political convictions are not desirable elements in judicial judgment, and to the extent that they inevitably creep in, they should be minimized as close to the vanishing point as possible by every conscious effort a judge can muster.</p>
<p>Judge Sotomayor, in the speeches from which she now flees unconvincingly—sorry, I mean which she now assures us were misunderstood—takes the view that gender and ethnicity influence the convictions of the judge, which in turn influence legal outcomes. Like the president, she celebrated this rather than worrying about it. Now she sings a different tune.</p></blockquote>
<p>The hearing is particularly disgusting. The next Supreme Court Justice of the United States, is lying though her teeth. Everyone on the left and right knows she is lying through her teeth and apparently no one cares.<br />
I know that she is trying to appear reasonable, and Republicans are trying to get her to admit her deep desire to replace the Constitution with the communist manifesto, but either she has enough contempt for the process to not even attempt to disguise her lying, or she doesn&#8217;t have the intellectual ability to fend off the Republicans while remaining true to her core principles.<br />
Either way she doesn&#8217;t deserve to be on the court. Yuck.<br />
Yahoo headline:<br />
<strong>Sotomayor vows stability even as trailblazing justice</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Devx</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/07/14/sotomayor-a-true-judge-incoherent/comment-page-1/#comment-58468</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Devx</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 14:54:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=7384#comment-58468</guid>
		<description>There&#039;s no doubt about it: Obama definitely threw a curve ball.

All of his advisors predicted the pitch would come in at 85 miles per hour, but they were off by a huge amount.  The pitch came in far slower than anyone expected and was completely ineffective.  Afterwards, the advisors blamed Bush, and said they&#039;d always planned on a very slow pitch that would end up being effective just in time to affect the 2010 elections.

Web aficionados analyzed the YouTube video of the pitch and determined it was far to the left of the plate.  But later that afternoon, when they clicked the link o return to the video, it now showed Obama winding up and delivering a blazing fastball at 104 miles per hour perfectly painting the outside corner of the plate.  And on the audio, the volume of the cheering crowd had somehow tripled in size.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s no doubt about it: Obama definitely threw a curve ball.</p>
<p>All of his advisors predicted the pitch would come in at 85 miles per hour, but they were off by a huge amount.  The pitch came in far slower than anyone expected and was completely ineffective.  Afterwards, the advisors blamed Bush, and said they&#8217;d always planned on a very slow pitch that would end up being effective just in time to affect the 2010 elections.</p>
<p>Web aficionados analyzed the YouTube video of the pitch and determined it was far to the left of the plate.  But later that afternoon, when they clicked the link o return to the video, it now showed Obama winding up and delivering a blazing fastball at 104 miles per hour perfectly painting the outside corner of the plate.  And on the audio, the volume of the cheering crowd had somehow tripled in size.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ymarsakar</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/07/14/sotomayor-a-true-judge-incoherent/comment-page-1/#comment-58464</link>
		<dc:creator>Ymarsakar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 14:27:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=7384#comment-58464</guid>
		<description>This is rather quaint. The perfect parable of news reporters focusing the camera in on Obama, the figure, and totally ignoring the consequences of Obama&#039;s actions.

So long as we have this bait and switch crook up on the mound, it doesn&#039;t matter what he threw. The fact that He threw it is what the media thinks we should pay attention to.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is rather quaint. The perfect parable of news reporters focusing the camera in on Obama, the figure, and totally ignoring the consequences of Obama&#8217;s actions.</p>
<p>So long as we have this bait and switch crook up on the mound, it doesn&#8217;t matter what he threw. The fact that He threw it is what the media thinks we should pay attention to.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gpc31</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/07/14/sotomayor-a-true-judge-incoherent/comment-page-1/#comment-58452</link>
		<dc:creator>gpc31</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:17:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=7384#comment-58452</guid>
		<description>And another thing, while I&#039;m at it...

The camera angle made it difficult if not impossible to tell if Obama threw a strike.  As flattering as possible to Obama, misleading in terms of outcome.  Kind of a metaphor, eh?

To me, baseball is the most important thing in life that doesn&#039;t matter.  I don&#039;t need no wussy armed pretender on the mound.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And another thing, while I&#8217;m at it&#8230;</p>
<p>The camera angle made it difficult if not impossible to tell if Obama threw a strike.  As flattering as possible to Obama, misleading in terms of outcome.  Kind of a metaphor, eh?</p>
<p>To me, baseball is the most important thing in life that doesn&#8217;t matter.  I don&#8217;t need no wussy armed pretender on the mound.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
